218280 Bullies, 8117 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 21 to 30 of 119
Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 123 4567 ... LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. It is Fake is offline
    It is Fake's Avatar

    Administrator

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    33,603

    Points
    64,358
    Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation First ClassOverdriveVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Posted On:
    8/22/2008 11:10am

    staff
     Style: xingyi

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Frank White
    There has been a long history of inefficient flowery styles of kung fu, though it probably has got worse in the 20th century.
    Please let us know what books you've read that makes you say this? I'd say the proliferation of guns made it flowery.

    I wouldn't say long history.
  2. Frank White is offline
    Frank White's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,456

    Points
    5,977
    Achievements:
    Three Friends1 year registered10000 Experience Points

    Posted On:
    8/22/2008 12:46pm


     Style: chinese boxing

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Also, the use of forms in competition instead of fighting. However long ago people decided that brick-breaking and other tests could be used to measure skill, instead of fighting.
  3. It is Fake is offline
    It is Fake's Avatar

    Administrator

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    33,603

    Points
    64,358
    Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation First ClassOverdriveVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Posted On:
    8/22/2008 3:29pm

    staff
     Style: xingyi

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Frank White
    Also, the use of forms in competition instead of fighting. However long ago people decided that brick-breaking and other tests could be used to measure skill, instead of fighting.
    Okay relative to you. I thought you came across something. I don't believe, from what I've read, that wood, brick or any other type of breaking was supposed to be a skill test. It was a training aid. Then it became competition based and stupid in modern times.
  4. lotusmaster is offline

    Featherweight

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    40

    Posted On:
    8/24/2008 4:51am

    Bullshido Newbie
     Style: Golden Lotus Kung-fu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by It is Fake
    Okay relative to you. I thought you came across something. I don't believe, from what I've read, that wood, brick or any other type of breaking was supposed to be a skill test. It was a training aid. Then it became competition based and stupid in modern times.
    I see what you guys are saying. However I feel fighting has taken away from the full range of the Martial Arts. Not just kung-fu but as a whole. Many people use the whole Martial comes from the Roman God of military/war and so it means military arts therefore you should fight. That does have merit but, they seem to forget that the military starts with diplomacy, and has units not dedicated to combat at all. Yet they talk as if a style does not fight it should not be a Martial Art. The military has always had scouts, medics, spys, stratigists, scientists, egineers, even priests and all of these things are part of the art of war. I acknowledge that I do teach combat methods but I respect the Zen archer, the Omei healer/medic, the Qi Gung practioner etc. as a part of the Martial Arts and i don't think I should have to beat them up to prove their worth. That's just my opinion.
  5. Robdogg is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Hawaii
    Posts
    339

    Points
    737
    Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Posted On:
    8/24/2008 5:30am


     Style: JKD, BJJ, FMA

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by lotusmaster
    Many people use the whole Martial comes from the Roman God of military/war and so it means military arts therefore you should fight.
    Sorta. Martial arts mean you have to know how to fight (or at the very bare minimum, its base should be in fighting; usually, the first option is preferred). So you have to fight in a controlled environment, which means you should spar. Preferably with a high level of contact and a nonexistent level of compliance.

    My point is, how often do you spar and how much contact is there usually? I think you implied frequent sparring + pretty high contact, but I can't be sure.

    Just curious.

    EDIT: That stuff aside, I appreciate the fact that you didn't come to this site acting like a dick who felt he was better than everyone else.
    Last edited by Robdogg; 8/24/2008 5:08pm at .
  6. It is Fake is offline
    It is Fake's Avatar

    Administrator

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    33,603

    Points
    64,358
    Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation First ClassOverdriveVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Posted On:
    8/24/2008 7:50am

    staff
     Style: xingyi

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by lotusmaster
    I see what you guys are saying. However I feel fighting has taken away from the full range of the Martial Arts. Not just kung-fu but as a whole.
    Uhmm how can it take away from something it started? Martial arts were alway about fighting, they then added all the other stuff later. So no fighting didn't corrupt Martial arts because, that is what it was about before all of the additions.

    Many people use the whole Martial comes from the Roman God of military/war and so it means military arts therefore you should fight. That does have merit but, they seem to forget that the military starts with diplomacy,
    No, it started with fighting then diplomacy came later.


    and has units not dedicated to combat at all.
    Every single person goes through basic to learn how to fight. After the fact, is when they go do logistics and all the non combat you are talking about.

    Yet they talk as if a style does not fight it should not be a Martial Art. The military has always had scouts, medics, spys, stratigists, scientists, egineers, even priests and all of these things are part of the art of war.
    They all go through basic fight training.

    I acknowledge that I do teach combat methods but I respect the Zen archer, the Omei healer/medic, the Qi Gung practioner etc. as a part of the Martial Arts and i don't think I should have to beat them up to prove their worth. That's just my opinion.
    All of which were added after the fact.
  7. lotusmaster is offline

    Featherweight

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    40

    Posted On:
    8/24/2008 9:14pm

    Bullshido Newbie
     Style: Golden Lotus Kung-fu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Robdogg
    Sorta. Martial arts mean you have to know how to fight (or at the very bare minimum, its base should be in fighting; usually, the first option is preferred). So you have to fight in a controlled environment, which means you should spar. Preferably with a high level of contact and a nonexistent level of compliance.

    My point is, how often do you spar and how much contact is there usually? I think you implied frequent sparring + pretty high contact, but I can't be sure.

    Just curious.

    EDIT: That stuff aside, I appreciate the fact that you didn't come to this site acting like a dick who felt he was better than everyone else.
    Our Kung-fu students spar at least 3x per week, or I guess I should say there are three out of seven days that we spar for class I can't control when the student shows up. We do point sparring for anyone with less than six months training however I emphasize that point is nothing like a fight and we use it to learn distancing, timing, and how to take angle and ground. Everybody else does continues sparring ( 3 3min. rounds w/30sec break in between).

    PS thanks for your compliment, I know I'm not the best out there and i am always learning.
  8. lotusmaster is offline

    Featherweight

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    40

    Posted On:
    8/24/2008 9:32pm

    Bullshido Newbie
     Style: Golden Lotus Kung-fu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by It is Fake
    Uhmm how can it take away from something it started? Martial arts were alway about fighting, they then added all the other stuff later. So no fighting didn't corrupt Martial arts because, that is what it was about before all of the additions.

    No, it started with fighting then diplomacy came later.


    Every single person goes through basic to learn how to fight. After the fact, is when they go do logistics and all the non combat you are talking about.

    They all go through basic fight training.

    All of which were added after the fact.
    This may be a chicken and the egg debate and you could be right but I don't believe martial arts started fighting. In fact I think it was exactly the opposite fighting created a need for Martial arts. Then civilization figured out, you know what no matter how many of them we kill there always seems to be a new opponent maybe there is a better way, which made MA evolve. In the American military yes there is a basic training for most listed but not all and in the military of old it was not required if you where a gifted strategist for you to waste time in fighting camp instead of telling the commander how to win the war. Martial arts as I see it was made for and originally about war not fighting. Fighting is what kids, dogs, and cocks do, great countries go to war they don't have single combat challenge matches. As far as war before diplomacy, according to the Sumerian legends that lead to the discovery of the oldest war relics in history some 6,000 years ago at ancient city of Hamaukar the battle was a result of negotiations between the city of Reichel and Sumerian dissidents who's city name has been lost but resided in lower Mesopotamia. Again none of us where there and you could be right and i could be wrong but it is none the less what I believe.
    He Ping 和平
  9. It is Fake is offline
    It is Fake's Avatar

    Administrator

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    33,603

    Points
    64,358
    Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation First ClassOverdriveVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Posted On:
    8/24/2008 9:45pm

    staff
     Style: xingyi

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by lotusmaster
    This may be a chicken and the egg debate and you could be right but I don't believe martial arts started fighting. In fact I think it was exactly the opposite fighting created a need for Martial arts.
    Interesting.
    Then civilization figured out, you know what no matter how many of them we kill there always seems to be a new opponent maybe there is a better way, which made MA evolve.
    Right which means you just agreed with me and there is no chicken and egg debate. You are just not wanting to be contrary because we disagree. Remember many people are forced to fight hence, Self Defense. So, even educated adults may end up in a fight.


    In the American military yes there is a basic training for most listed but not all and in the military of old it was not required if you where a gifted strategist for you to waste time in fighting camp instead of telling the commander how to win the war. Martial arts as I see it was made for and originally about war not fighting.
    Well, I disagree because many legends talk about one on one fights. Many documented styles show it was for personal defense.

    Many wars started because of a small fight.

    Fighting is what kids, dogs, and cocks do,
    There are millions of cops and regular people that disagree. Ah semantics.

    great countries go to war they don't have single combat challenge matches.
    In modern times yes. In old times (since you are going back and forth) yes single combat was used.
    Also, many a Kung Fu Master did just that, they engaged in challenge matches.

    As far as war before diplomacy, according to the Sumerian legends that lead to the discovery of the oldest war relics in history some 6,000 years ago at ancient city of Hamaukar the battle was a result of negotiations between the city of Reichel and Sumerian dissidents who's city name has been lost but resided in lower Mesopotamia. Again none of us where there and you could be right and i could be wrong but it is none the less what I believe.
    He Ping 和平
    Yes, that is fine. Yet, it is documented, much of the philosophy you aren't sure about was added by Sun Lutang.

    We will have to agree to disagree.
  10. NJM is offline
    NJM's Avatar

    Putting the "ow" back in "flowery technique"

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,682

    Points
    2,980
    Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran5000 Experience Points

    Posted On:
    8/24/2008 10:29pm


     Style: CMA, MT

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by lotusmaster
    As far as war before diplomacy, according to the Sumerian legends that lead to the discovery of the oldest war relics in history some 6,000 years ago at ancient city of Hamaukar the battle was a result of negotiations between the city of Reichel and Sumerian dissidents who's city name has been lost but resided in lower Mesopotamia. Again none of us where there and you could be right and i could be wrong but it is none the less what I believe.
    He Ping 和平
    Reichel is the name of the archeologist, not the city. The Sumerian city's name that was "lost" was Uruk; they were proto-uruk civilization.

    And what makes you think the battle was a result of sour negotiations? I would need to see a tablet saying "100 bushels of date palm fruit in tribute owed to proto-uruk civilization unpaid" or something. Where's the evidence?

    Quote Originally Posted by It is Fake
    much of the philosophy you aren't sure about was added by Sun Lutang.
    Are you talking about Sun Lutang's pacifistic philosophy?
    Last edited by NJM; 8/24/2008 10:32pm at .
Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 123 4567 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.